Added variety demands for tiles representing organic stuff and decal demands for tiles representing man-made stuff. Also added the demand to make tilesets 8-way to allow mapping convenience. Do take note that organic borders such as water edges, grass/dirt transitions, etc. should also have variation tiles!

Damnit. You only brought up licenses so I would waste an hour being paranoid as to whether this project would become proprietary. Everything in capitalist society is about money, not just money but HOARDING it. Money pits people against each other. The more money we make the more money we then want. It's clear enough that none of us has money and none of us should expect to get money through the project. So then, really, who gives a feces? Use the WTFPL.

I do not have any personal desires to make the game commercial, but I do not want to restrict the freedom of others to do a commercial fork on the content if they so desire.

For the artists this would probably be the best possible advertisement for their skills: to be published commercially. Opening up gates and having CV references is better than not getting any notability at all, IMO. You'd be doing the art out of your own desire for the project for free anyway: see it as a potential side bonus alongside self improvement of art skills in a deadline-free non-commercial environment.

That aside, CC3-BY-SA vs. GPLv2 incompatibility is solved by getting the permission of the original artist if there is something we want to use. Relicensing is never impossible.

So, who are against CC3-BY-SA and why? Who are for CC3-BY-SA? We are discussing this now so we can pick something with which people are happy with (morally or otherwise). I do not want to push anything down your throats and my only issue with current licensing is the simple fact GPLv2 is made for code and not for content.

Though I need a few more all-nighters, I've been improving and am seeing some good results, but will not post WIP unless flattered into doing so. Thick skin doesn't protect against self-hate and embarrassment.

*sigh* as for the fine print, I was thinking of cross-licensing to allow mixing with GPL2... but that would be pointless. My GNU/Linux distro is Trisquel, I don't know if they would accept CC-BY-SA-3.0 data into their repositories. They should as long as it does not deny the 4 freedoms. The GNU project has stated that works of art are exceptional to their philosophy which applies more to practical works such as code.I fully support using CC-BY-SA-3.0 if:

Version control doesn't become any more legally burdened.

Third parties don't have to plaster attributional messages that interfere with enjoyment of the game and ease of forking.

THAT DEVELOPERS MARK THE NAMES AND THE DATES OF THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER. In essense I mean DO NOT ALLOW FILES LACKING THE INFORMATION WE NEED.

No more files without stamps. All of the boring legal ground must be covered. There should be no question as to who the author is, what he derived the work from, and what her/his license is.

Let's say that The Mana World is mentioned on TV in the News, or in a gamer's magazine, would they have dis-incentive to mention us because they would have to put fine print exceptional to the "All rights reserved (ARR!) status-quo of everything in the bourgeoisie's overworld?

Some of the old game data developers (I prefer not to use the word "content") have vanished.
The old practice was to not care about putting their name and license of choice on files.
They probably did not leave behind contact information either.
They might call me a "freetard" for asking them if it is okay for a remix to be CC-BY-SA-3.0.

I was hoping that cross licensing would be a compromise... I just don't know and don't see the point. Trust me, I want to work hard on really good stuff. I want to be the next Len So... I'm blathering and just trying to socialize. Have pity.

Please read on though and I will try to make it worth your time...

I feel that we are upsetting a few or more senior graphics data developers by disregarding their work instead of using our freedom to build on what they've made for us. The woodland tile-set could be made easier on the eyes, but not merely by adjusting saturation. There's the issue of depth.
Taking the saturation from Crush's work takes depth away too, and he is right to stand by his preference, least someone merely decrement saturation.
It would be another all-nighter carefully shifting the hue and contrast, then seeing if it needs retouched with transparent pencil. It also needs muddy area to encircle waters instead of directly transitioning into grass. Some of the bends are too sharp and could be smoothed to rid the staircase effect some.

In any case I would feel bad about brushing aside anyone's work that can be hacked. If that's our practice we will be having this discussion for years to come.

In my tmw folder is an arena.xcf file. Its purpose is to extend the old arena and to re-draw the columns at 45 degree angles, and remake the arena floor at that angle. Not a newbie resize-job, but hard back-breaking work. My only problem is... WHO THE HECK ARE THE ORIGINAL AUTHORS?

Do you people hate your craft so much that you are ashamed to put your name and terms in the PNG comment section?
Nobody wants to work hard only to receive a cease-and-desist. Though that is paranoia considering the upload policy.

Now back to actual graphics guidelines...

I have another old favorite RPG, if you can guess, that appears to have a way tiles are made that helps sprites be visible. The rule would be this: NEVER USE DARK OUTLINES IN TILESETS. Only use dark outlines on interactive objects. This rule, I believe, makes it much easier to see your character and the characters on screen. Object outlines must be darker than the outlines on tiles or focus is broken I believe.

I hope I've made at least a few good points, if not I am sorry.

I'll do all I can for the project, even if there is no clear direction.